agnostids
Both the author and the lecturer discuss different theories about how agnostids may have lived. The passage claims that there are several different theories about agnostids living. The professor, on the other hand, cast doubt on the authenticity of theories mentioned in the reading through citing three reasons. First, both the author and the professor talk about possibility of being free-swimming predators. According to the passage, the agnostids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted smaller animals. The lecturer, nevertheless, rejects author's view and illustrates the idea that predators need large eyes and strong vision, but according to the fossil records, agnostids have had tiny eyes or even they have been blind. Second of all, both the reading and the lecture discuss prone of being seafloor dwellers. The author argues that they may have dwelled on the seafloor and they would have survived by scavenging dead organisms or by grazing on bacteria. However, the professor refutes this, saying that dwellers usually are not fast and they are not able to get far away from specific area, but agnostids have lived in multiple areas and they were capable of moving from one place to another pretty fast. Eventually, the passage and the lecture address the subject of being parasites. The passage goes on to mention that there is a possibility that the agnostids would have been parasites, living on and feeding off larger organism. In contrast, the professor points out that parasites usually have small population, but agnostids have had great size population, so they could not be parasites.
All in all, the author maintains that divers theories could explain shape of agnostids life, while the professor not only cast doubt on it, but she also demonstrates that these theories has serious weaknesses.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'several'.
Suggestion: several
...ived. The passage claims that there are several different theories about agnostids living. The pr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, then, well, while, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 7.30242825607 219% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1536.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2602739726 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60974858391 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530821917808 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 460.8 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.1941502116 49.2860985944 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.153846154 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4615384615 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.53846153846 7.06452816374 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 4.09492273731 49% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251458037427 0.272083759551 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107759649012 0.0996497079465 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0929050723114 0.0662205650399 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.186577520119 0.162205337803 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.050913623707 0.0443174109184 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted. The correct pattern:
para 1: introduction
para 2: doubt 1
para 3: doubt 2
para 4: doubt 3
Less contents wanted from the reading passages(25%), more content wanted from the lecture (75%).
Don't need a conclusion paragraph.
Read sample essays from ETS:
http://www.testbig.com/users/toeflwritingmaster
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.